Gun ownership in Britain was comparitevly small compared to the US and incidents involving firearms were always connected with crime and the use of illegaly held firearms. The removal of legally held guns would have been a struggle for the government as public support would have been for the 'gun holders rights', who would be seen as the victims.
It would also not have gained much publicity and would have been political suicide to wage a war against the civil liberties of a minority group.
In steps the perfect vehicle to start the abolition of firearms from public ownership, the brutal slaying of children. It is interesting to point out there were only two incidents in britain needed to bring about the change in law and a similar number of High profile incidents in Australia. Whereas America is holding out in the face of mounting massacres.
To say these incidents were timely would be an understatement, and one wonders if they were acts of insanity or carefully manipulated acts of barbarity. The incidents in the US although terrible were not gaining enough support due to the number of gun owning people in power, so the incidents seem to be gaining in momentum and are hitting children and religious groups more now than they have ever done. It is also interesting to notice that the victims are becoming more middle class and white, hitting at the core of American's, who have the clout to make a change.
People do not believe these incidents could be contrived because to them the loss of the firearm is not that important, but
in the bigger picture the public ownership of firearms is a direct threat on the future plans of the NWO. In political terms the
end justifies the means.
No body questions the millions who died during WWII because the result was the end of Hitler and the potential invasion of Britain, the end justifed the means (although heavy it was accepted and even decorated)